Hours after a special Delhi court discharged him in the Aircel-Maxis deal case, former communications minister Dayanidhi Maran on Thursday said he was innocent and the judgment vindicated his stand.
"I have always placed my trust in the Indian judiciary system. Today I stand vindicated. When the accusation was put on me, I resigned as the union minister. At that time I stated that I would prove my innocence and today I stand vindicated. Today i would like to thank all my friends who stood by me and trusted me," Maran told ANI.
Maran along with his brother, Kalanidhi Maran, and others were discharged by the Patiala House Court in the corruption and money laundering cases connected with the Aircel-Maxis deal.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probed the corruption case, while the Enforcement Directorate (ED) went into the money laundering charges.
Special Judge O.P. Saini discharged Maran his brother Kalanidhi Maran, Kalanidhi's wife Kavery Kalanidhi, South Asia FM Ltd (SAFL) Managing Director K. Shanmugam and two companies -- SAFL and Sun Direct TV Pvt Ltd (SDTPL) in two different cases.
Also Read
In the ED case, Maran brothers, Kavery Kalanidhi, South Asia FM Ltd (SAFL) Managing Director K. Shanmugam and two companies -- SAFL and Sun Direct TV Pvt Ltd (SDTPL) were accused.
The court on November 16 had also reserved its order, but had to defer it six times as documents were extremely voluminous, old, dusty, technical and complex in nature.
In August 2014, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a chargesheet against Maran brothers, alleging that Dayanidhi Maran used his influence to help Krishnan buy Aircel by coercing its owner Sivasankaran to part with his stake.
Sivasankaran alleged that Dayanidhi Maran favoured the Maxis Group in the takeover of his company. In return, Maran alleged that the company made investments through Astro Network in a company stated to be owned by the Maran family.
The chargesheet was filed under Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code and other relevant provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
